- Systems of equations with elimination: King's cupcakes
- Systems of equations with elimination: x-4y=-18 & -x+3y=11
- Systems of equations with elimination
- Systems of equations with elimination: potato chips
- Systems of equations with elimination (and manipulation)
- Systems of equations with elimination challenge
- Why can we subtract one equation from the other in a system of equations?
- Elimination method review (systems of linear equations)
Systems of equations with elimination: potato chips
Sal solves another system of equations using elimination. Created by Sal Khan.
Want to join the conversation?
- When Sal says to multiple by -2 couldn't you just multiple by positive 2 and subtract instead of add?(26 votes)
- Yes. It is perfectly acceptable to subtract the equations like you said, so long as you subtract on both sides. This would have given you the same solution as well. Nice observation!(26 votes)
- Is Arbegla's name based off of algebra? "Algebra" spelt backwards is "Arbegla".(9 votes)
That's why I felt somthing similar from"arbegla" to "algebra"
UPDATE: I search him on google and can't seem to find him(5 votes)
- Sal, how long did it take you to draw these images in your videos?(8 votes)
- How do you solve this equation?
- Multiply the first equation by 2, then subtract the second equation. Here:
Now, just plug 1 back into either equation to solve for x.(8 votes)
- People in this kingdom are fat five cupcakes
3 potato chips bags(7 votes)
- The parties could be flawed, possibly because each man/woman could have eaten less because Arbegla may have ordered less than needed? Or are they assuming that it is one of those times where he ordered enough/more than enough?(5 votes)
- You are quite right eshi21 however this is a scenario so just ignore it.(1 vote)
- haha get it? Arbegla? Algebra? GET IT?!?!(4 votes)
- yes it is funny(2 votes)
- When sal manipulates the second equation by multiplying it with negative 2. Can we instead subtract -700w. because technically that would all manipulate the equation, but in a different way and then also we will be able to cancel out w in the equation.(4 votes)
- That doesn't seem like it would quite work. The only way you could subtract 700w would be if you had already added the two equations together, and then you would still end up just moving w to the right-hand side of the equation:
Subtract 700w from both sides:
The way Mr. Khan does it in the video maintains the same relationship between the equation, and also gives us the ability to cancel out one of the variables. Hopefully that helped, and if it didn't you can tell me.(2 votes)
- i dont understand when in the end of the problems we have -1000 -500 and it gives us 2, the same with 300 - 100 = 3
Thank you.(2 votes)
- It doesn't have: -1000 -500 = 2 OR 300 - 100 = 3
You are ignoring the division
The video has: -1000 / (-500) in fraction form. The bar in the middle of the fraction is division. When you divide, it = 2
the video also has: 300 / 100 in fraction form. Again, this is division, not subtraction.
When you divide, it = 3
Hope this helps.(6 votes)
- how did you get 1200 for 300w and 200m ?? wouldn't it be 500
and also how did u get 1100 for 100 and 400?? wouldn't it be 600(0 votes)
- 1200 is the number of bags eaten all together.
According to your theory each man and each woman would have to eat 1 bag each.
Then 500 bags would have been eaten.
However you do not know how many bags each person eats, only how many have been eaten at the end of the day, which is 1200.
This is a fact.
w stands for the amount of bags eaten per woman, which you thought was 1.
m stands for the amount of bags eaten per man.
By solving the equations you can find out, what numbers w and m represent.(7 votes)
Everyone in the kingdom is very impressed with your ability to help with the party planning, everyone except for this gentlemen right over here. This is Arbegla. And he is the king's top adviser, and also chief party planner. And he seems somewhat threatened by your ability to solve these otherwise unsolvable problems, or at least from his point of view, because he keeps over-ordering or under-ordering things like cupcakes. And he says, king, that cupcake problem was easy. Ask them about the potato chip issue, because we could never get the potato chips right. And so the king says, Arbegla, that's a good idea. We need to get the potato chips right. So he comes to you and says, how do we figure out, on average, how many potato chips we need to order? And to do that, we have to figure out how much, on average, does each man eat and how much each woman eats. You say, well, what about the children? The king says, in our kingdom, we forbid potato chips for children. You say, oh, well, that's all and good. Tell me what happened at the previous parties. And so the king says, you might remember, at the last party, in fact, the last two parties, we had 500 adults. At the last party, 200 of them were men, and 300 of them were women. And in total, they ate 1,200 bags of potato chips. And you say, what about the party before that? He says, that one, we had a bigger skew towards women. We only had 100 men, and we have 400 women. And that time, we actually had fewer bags consumed-- 1,100 bags of potato chips. So you say, OK, king and Arbegla, this seems like a fairly straightforward thing. Let me define some variables to represent our unknowns. So you go ahead and you say, well, let's let m equal the number of bags eaten by each man. And you could think of it on average, or maybe all the men in that kingdom are completely identical. Or maybe it's the average number of bags eaten by each man. And let's let w equal the number of bags eaten by each woman. And so with these definitions of our variables, let's think about how we can represent this first piece of information, this piece of information in green. Well, let's think about the total number of bags that the men ate. You had 200 men. Let me scroll over a little bit. You had 200 men, and they each ate m bags, m bags per man. So the men at this first party collectively ate 200 times m bags. If m is 10 bags per man, then this would be 2,000. If m was 5 bags per man, then this would be 5,000. We don't know what m is, but 200 times m is the total eaten by the men. Same logic-- total eaten by the women is 300 women times the number of bags eaten by each woman. And so if you add the total to eaten by the men and the women, you get the 1,200 bags. So this is information, written algebraically, given these variable definitions. Now, let's do the same thing with the second part of the information that they gave us right over here. Let's think about how we can represent this algebraically. Well, similar logic-- what was a total that the men ate at that party? It was 100 men times m bags per man. And we're assuming that m is the same across parties, that men, on average, always eat the same number of bags. And how many did the women eat at that second party? Well, you had 400 women. And on average, they ate w bags per woman. So this is 400 times w is the total number that the women ate. You add those two together, you get the total number that all the adults ate. So this is going to be 1,100 bags. So it looks pretty similar now. You have a system of two equations with two unknowns. And so you try your best to solve it. But when you solve it, you see something interesting. Last time, it was very convenient. You had a, I think it was a 500 here, for 500 adults, and you had another 500. And so it seemed like it was pretty easy to cancel out one of the variables. Here it seems a little bit more difficult. What's multiplying by the m's, it's different here. The coefficient on the w is different over here. You say, well, maybe I can change one of these equations so it makes it a little bit easier to cancel out with the other equation. So what if, for example, I were to take this blue equation right over here and multiply it by negative 2? And you might say, well, Sal, why are we multiplying it by negative 2? Well, if were to multiply it by negative 2, this 100m would become a negative 200m. And if it was a negative 200m, then that would cancel out with a positive 200m when we add the two. So let's see what happens. So let's multiply this blue equation by negative 2. We're going to multiply by negative 2. Let me scroll over to the left a little bit. So what happens? Remember, when we multiply an equation, we can't just do one side of the equation. We have to do the entire equation in order for the equality to hold true. So negative 2 times 100m is negative 200m. Negative 2 times 400w-- there's a positive right over there. So it becomes negative 800w. And then negative 2-- now, we did the left hand side, but we also have to do the right hand side. Negative 2 times 1,100 is negative 2,200. So just to be clear, this equation that I just wrote here essentially has the same information we just manipulated. We just changed this equation, multiplied both sides by negative 2. But it's kind of the same constraint. But what makes this interesting is, now, we can rewrite this green equation. Let me do it over here, this first one. 200m plus 300w is equal to 1,200. And the whole reason why I multiplied by negative 2 is, so that if I were to add these two things, I might be able to get rid of that variable over there. And so let's do that. Let's add the left hand sides, and let's add the right hand sides. And you could literally view it as, we're starting with this blue equation. We're adding this quantity, the left hand side of the yellow equation to the left hand side of the blue. And then 1,200 is the exact same thing that we're adding to the right hand side. We know that this is equal to this. So we can add this to the left hand side and this to the right hand side. So let's see what happens. So the good thing is, the whole reason we multiplied it by negative 2, so that these two characters cancel out. You add those two together. You just get 0m or just 0. You have negative 800w plus 300w. Well, that's negative 500w. And then on the right hand side, you have negative 2,200 plus 1,200. So that's negative 1,000. And now this is pretty straightforward-- one equation, one unknown, a fairly straightforward equation. We divide both sides by the coefficient of w, multiplying w. So divide by negative 500 on the left, divide by negative 500 on the right. And we are left with w is equal to 2. On average, women ate two bags of potato chips at these parties. We're assuming that's constant across the parties. So let's think about how you would then figure out how many bags, on average, each man ate. Well, to do that, we just go back to either one of these equations. In the last set of videos, I went to the first equation. I'll show that the second equation should also work. Either one should work. So let's substitute back into the second equation. And you could either pick this version of it or this one. But I'll pick the original one. So you have 100 times m, which we're trying to figure out, plus 400 times-- well, we now know that w is equal to 2-- 400 times 2 is equal to 1,100. So you have 100m plus 800 is equal to 1,100. And now, to solve for m, we could subtract 800 from both sides. And we are left with 100m is equal to 300. And now, divide both sides by 100. And we are left with m, which is, on average, the number of bags of chips each man eats is equal to 3. So you have solved Arbegla's problem, what he thought was a difficult problem, using the magical, mystical powers of algebra. You were able to tell the king in his party planning process that, on average, the men will eat three bags of potato chips each. And on average, the women will eat two bags of potato chips each.